Europe’s nobility saw absolutism as a complete loss of political power and influence. Absolutism was the governmental principle that the reigning monarch has a great, divine power, which is hindered by no one else within the country they rule. The 17th and 18th centuries was period in which nobles once held power and influence over government was diminished to the precipice of oblivion. King Louis XIV in France, the Hohenzollerns of Prussia, and Peter the Great of Russia all sought complete control of their territories. Although their economic statuses remained, the power of the European nobles had weakened. After the Sun King stated, “I am the state,” the people of France knew that he was the only, divine ruler of their country, and were made to believe that anything he does is infallible. During his reign, the nobility didn’t have much say in the French laws, foreign policies, or commerce, but were house at Louis’ palace at Versailles to keep them close and happy. Most nobles were exempt from taxation and boasted great wealth, but had no political influence. A majority of Louis’s reign was spent in war, which forced many nobles to fulfill their obligation as soldiers. The French nobility preserved their privileged position under Louis XIV, but never obtained the political titles taken over by ministers, bishops, and France’s top thinkers Russia’s Tsar, Peter the Great, had a great dominance of power during his reign and never distributed it with the nobility . St. Petersburg, a port city with western influence, became the new capital of Russia after its move from Moscow. The Tsar forced his nobles to cut off their beards (a sign of God’s favorability), wear common clothes, and live a western lifestyle as commoners. The creation of the Table of Ranks made sure that nobles who sought to serve high positions were “important” enough to do so. As is custom with most nobles, the Russian nobles owned vast amounts of land and serfs, much like the...

YOU MAY ALSO FIND THESE DOCUMENTS HELPFUL

...Absolutism and Peter the Great
Many monarchs, particularly those of European descent, employed the flourishing absolutist philosophy during their reign in the seventeenth century. Defined as the "absolute or unlimited rule usually by one man," absolutism is virtually equivalent to the philosophy of despotism. A ruler incorporating the absolutist philosophy has complete control of his subjects and the highest authority with which to govern. With origins dating back to the Ancient Greeks, absolutism found root in some of Aristotle's theories: "Aristotle despotic government (nearly convertible with tyrannical) is that of a single ruler that rules, not for the public good but for his own." And from Roman political theory "regarding the power of the monarch, there had survived, particularly, a legacy of ideas associated with the position and prestige of a ruler which greatly strengthened the power of a dynasty.” Based on this Greek foundation in Aristotelian thought and Roman political theory, absolutism rose in other schools of philosophy as it gained prominence in the political world.
Combining natural-law doctrines with the theory of royal absolutism, fourteenth century philosopher Bartolus of Sassoferrato believed that the ruler should not be bound to the laws of the government, but still should obey them whenever possible. In agreement with Bartolus, another fourteenth century philosopher,...

...Max Mayer
HIS 102
Prof. McGowen
GTF Nick O’Neill
Feb 25, 2013
Absolutism
Most historians would argue that the years 1660 to 1789 could be summarized as an Age of Absolutism, the period from the Restoration in England and the personal rule of Louis XIV up to the beginning of the French Revolution. Our textbook defines absolutism as “a political arrangement in which one ruler possesses unrivaled power (Western Civilization pg 184). Rulers received their power directly from God – theory of divine right – claiming they were above the law. As a result, absolute monarchs were viewed differently among the individual’s social class; the Noble’s view differed from the every day commoner’s view.
Due to the divine right kingship beliefs monarchs receive an endless amount of power. Subjects believed God would only invest the ruler he appointed with powers that resembled his own, therefore any resistant to their monarch was forbidden. In Richard II, subjects look upon the Monarch of England as a godly figure. Throughout the play, King Richard and the Duchess make several references to “sacred blood;” a clear reference to Richard II being appointed by God (divinely appointed). An important nobleman, John of Gaunt, describes Richard II, “God’s is the quarrel; for God’s substitute/ His deputy anointed in his sight”(Shakespeare 13). Richard II is understood to be God’s presence on earth, once again supporting the theory of divine right....

..."God is holiness itself, goodness itself, and the power itself. In these things lies the majesty of God. In the image of these things lies the majesty of the prince."
The thesis statement above by Jacques-Benigne Bossuet clearly illustrates the concept or theory of the Divine Right of Kings' which basically argues that certain kings ruled because they were chosen (by God) to do so and that these kings were accountable to no person except God respecting only the fundamental laws. Because the monarch ruled with "absolute" or unshared power, the term absolutism' came about. These kings are said to rule absolutely by the will of God. To oppose the king was equivalent to a rebellion against God. The king therefore was not to be questioned or disobeyed. According to Bossuet, God's purpose in instituting absolute monarchy was to protect and guide the society.
I believe that the thesis statement above is one that is very ideal. Yes, I believe that the majesty of God lies on the fact that he is holy, good and powerful. If the prince can truly be in the image of God, then arguments regarding the divine right of the ruler are not necessary. For indeed it is in God's image that the prince becomes majestic. The last part of the statement which says that "In the image of these things lies the majesty of the prince", shows the great potential of the ruler if he is able to live up to the likeness of God. This of course is quite impossible. No one can...

...Moral Absolutism
a) Explain what is meant by Moral Absolutism. (25)
Moral absolutism is an ethical theory which believes that there are absolute standards against which moral questions can be judged, and that certain actions are either right or wrong. Moral absolutists might, for example, judge slavery, war, dictatorship, the death penalty, or child abuse to be absolutely immoral regardless of the situations or beliefs of a culture that engages in these practices. Moral absolutism adopts the theory that certain actions are moral or immoral regardless of the circumstances in which they occur.
Absolutists consider that the Ten Commandments, found in the book of Exodus, are rules which should never be broken - no matter what. For example, one of the commandments found in Exodus 20:13 is "You shall not kill" and absolutists believe that this rule should never be broken. They would not even agree with the murder of one person, such as a terrorist, in order to save an entire nation. Another example is lying, certain absolutists feel that they should never lie no matter what the consequences are, even if it was in order to save an innocent persons life or to promote some sort of good.
Plato was the first philosopher to raise an example of moral absolutism in western society; the Theory of the Forms. Plato stated that the forms are concepts that are eternally constant, and provide meaning and structure...

...PH – 309
Ethical Theory
Paper 1
Morality Is Absolute
Morality is absolute, universal, and objective. I hope to support this theory of Moral Absolutism by (1) discussing the invalid arguments suggested by Ethical Subjective Relativists, (2) discussing the invalid arguments suggested by Ethical Conventional Relativists, and (3) relating inherent human rights to the necessity of absolute morality. Allow me to take this moment to clarify what is meant by MoralAbsolutism. The theory of Absolutism is in large part regarded and understood through its Christian religious context. That is, moral obligations and duties are thought to derive from and be expressed to us through divine commands. For the purpose of this paper I have respectfully chosen to approach Morality from a nontheistic perspective. To define, Moral Absolutism is a theory that claims there to exist distinct inherent objective moral principles which all persons should follow when evaluating what is right from what is wrong. Its theorized moral transcript is unwavering in the sense that it sets forth clear and precise instructions, principles, or guidelines for the expected behavior of individuals. In laymen’s terms, it lays out the dos and don’ts for life in general. These indisputable principles are objective in the sense that the requirements – a person or persons obligations, duties, rights, and prohibitions – are, and always have always...

...Absolutism and relativism are two extreme ethical approaches to reality. While they are both valid and supported by facts, they are very contrasting in their views. Values are what a person cares about and thinks is worthwhile. For example, values can include life, love, religious faith, freedom, relationships,health, justice, education, family and many other things. Usually these values are what provides the passion in a person's life, and gives them hope and a reason for being. A person might go to any lengths to protect what they feel is right and to preserve these values. Values can be divided up into two subcategories absolute and relative. Absolute values deal with conventional ethics. In absolutism, everything is certain. Relativism, on the other hand, is more subjective.
Relativism and absolutism are only two of the many ethical viewpoints studied by ethicists today. Pope Benedict XVI brought up many issues revolving around these two viewpoints during his time as Pope. He never strictly used the term "relativism" but he did "fault modern people for missing the transcendent meaning of love and instead caring for one another just because we feel like it". The ideas behind relativism may be misleading or confusing to some, but are essential to any worldview, including the pope's.
Pope Benedict worries that a person's individual autonomy has been lifted and valued above moral absolutes. Most people understand that lying is...

...Moral Absolutism – The Road by Cormac McCarthy
The Road by Cormac McCarthy is a novel based in a post-apocalyptic world. It revolves around the life of a father and a son who are struggling to survive. Everything around them is destroyed, filled with ash and stripped of life yet the two continue to move south, towards the sea hoping for better days to come. Their lives are lived in a constant state of fear. Every day spent scavenging for food as they are constantly moving, trying to stay unnoticed and safe. In the world that they live in, survival is the only goal and the concept of morality has become non-existent. Cannibalism is the greatest fear as everyone is a predator. But in this “Barren, silent, godless” (4) world, where “the days more gray each one then what had gone before” (1) and where man is prey to man, the man and the boy hold their ground. They have not yet lost their sense of morality and refuse to resort to a lifestyle that many around them have adapted. To them certain acts are “intrinsically wrong” (O’Brien) and never justifiable. This way of thinking and ethical view resonates with the concept of moral absolutism. This philosophy, built on the foundations of Immanuel Kant’s belief that morality is the ability to act rationally, may be used as an explanation as to why the man and boy stick to their principles. Though, the two have very similar beliefs, the extent to which they follow and believe in them is different as the...

...Some of us like to believe that we are all born of sin and into sin regardless of what culture, race, ethnic identity, or class. We all have a sense of what is morally right and the relativity of it. There are traits, customs, and beliefs that make us distinctive to certain cultures, races, and classes, which due to the differences we all follow, a set of different moral standards. Each culture tackles moral questions based on their own moral beliefs. Universal moral requirements are presented to show that through differences there is still a huge connection of moral beliefs to show that we are more alike, than we as humans are willing to admit. Relativism maintains when it comes to right and wrong there is neither, because what is virtuous within a particular individual, culture or societies morality must be understood and taken into consideration (Mosser, 2010).
Looking into the arguments of Lenn Goodman that there are certain things that are simply wrong, there are some who would definitely agree, yet there will be a few that would present a logical argument that would contradict his arguments. The areas of moral debates that Goodman chose would bring on a mass debate of arguments when it comes to cultures, races, ethic identities, or classes.
Within the American society there are a huge amount of different cultures that certain cultural virtues held by some groups will not be acted upon due to the laws of the United States. The beliefs of Lenn Goodman...